Talk:César Franck

While it is true that Franck's cyclical method influenced later composers, it seems flatly untrue that Berlioz or Saint-Saens were beneficiaries of this influence. Berlioz died in 1869, well before any of Franck's major works were even written or published. Saint-Saens outlived Franck by several decades, but reportedly loathed Franck's style. If anyone can back up tis assertion otherwise, I'll renstert the sentence. Brennan Milligan 22:45, 24 March 2006 (UTC)Reply

TBHecht, I think the paragraph "The Man" doens't say enough to be considered as an apart paragraph. I even doubt the text; the text is basically concerning his influence (cyclic form); therefore, I think this sentence could be added to "Influence". — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dr. Friendly (talk • contribs) 17:15, 4 June 2006 (UTC)Reply

It looks like the citations are missing. At the moment, the notable recordings aren't referenced, but it looks like they are. Can anyone fix this? ♫ Melodia Chaconne ♫ 01:24, 20 January 2007 (UTC)Reply

The article needs work with respect to citations. For example this statement:

His decision to give up a career as a virtuoso led to strained relations with his father during this time.<ref>v</ref>.

I may be hilariously unaware of something, but I'm sincerely ignorant of what "v" is as a reference.

Richard David Ramsey 22:41, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Please do not remove this on the grounds of WP:EL. This page has information about and music by Franck. As WP:EL says, the officially sanctioned online site of a rock band has a direct and symmetric relationship to that rock band, and thus should be linked from the rock band's Wikipedia article. My Franck page fits this as closely as any deceased composer's page would. His music is all out of copyright, he has no official record label. Therefore, this is a page which should be linked to. --Vox Humana 8' 22:12, 18 February 2007 (UTC)Reply

It also says to avoid "social networking sites" (such as Myspace). It ALSO says to avoid "Links to blogs and personal webpages, except those written by a recognized authority." -- are you a recognized athority? ♫ Melodia Chaconne ♫ 22:52, 18 February 2007 (UTC)Reply

Maybe not recognised, but I do know a lot about Franck. My mother is a professional organist and I have known the music of César Franck since birth.--Vox Humana 8' 12:40, 19 February 2007 (UTC)Reply

Your MySpace page on Cesar Franck is interesting and witty, but regrettably it definitely can't be linked to a Wikipedia article, as it violates WP:EL on several grounds: (1) social networking (MySpace); (2) blog; (3) a link to your own website; (4) COPYVIO (the recorded music), etc. I've deleted it accordingly. JGHowes ^talk - 12:21, 20 June 2007 (UTC)Reply

It's not social networking - as it's a music page, it's music promotion. Also, the copyright on Franck's music expired in 1965, so the Copyvio claim is without foundation. It's not a blog, either. The 'blog' function is used solely to educate its readership about the music. The own website thing hardly applies, either - I merely run the page. It is in effect Franck's website. I get no glorification from that page.--Vox Humana 8' 12:33, 20 June 2007 (UTC)Reply

Can we put the link here in the talk page? There are several wikipedia policies which maybe well meaning but dogmatic adherence to them is only an irritation for those who want to use the wikipedia as a source of information. The links are extremely useful for those who want to know more, even if those more pedantic ideology bound wikipedians disaprove. --Godfinger 00:35, 9 August 2007 (UTC)Reply

The article refers to him in various places as simply "Franck", and I have no problem with that. My question relates to the outside world (ugh!), where he is often introduced as "César Franck", whereas other long-dead composers tend to be referred by surname only (Beethoven, Brahms, Mendelssohn, etc). For example, a concert broadcast on radio will be announced as "a concert containing works by Schubert, Beethoven, César Franck, and Mahler", rather than "a concert containing works by Schubert, Beethoven, Franck, and Mahler". There is no other famous composer with the surname Franck (as there is with the Bachs), so there's no disambiguation involved. Why does César, virtually alone of all the famous dead composers, get this treatment? It's not because he's considered a relatively minor composer, because Hummel, Henselt, Moszkowski, Bortniansky, Weinberger and so many other minor composers still get the surname-only treatment. What makes César Franck so special? -- JackofOz (talk) 02:28, 19 March 2008 (UTC)Reply

I for one cannot answer your question... I myself have never heard (or at least noticed) that Franck's name is treated differently than other composers'. —Cor anglais 16 03:29, 19 March 2008 (UTC)Reply

Perhaps it is because his last name is monosyllabic? Hey, I'm just sayin' . . . -User:Random Pipings —Preceding comment was added at 12:07, 26 March 2008 (UTC)Reply

get over it —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.61.122.222 (talk) 03:31, 16 April 2008 (UTC)Reply

Maybe all of the above, plus that many famous people have been surnamed "Franck" or "Frank" (see, e.g., the disambiguation page for Franck. Additionally, especially in oral discourse, some concern may exist that "Frank" by itself could possibly be misconstrued as a given name. Richard David Ramsey 22:35, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Observe that Melchior Franck (1579-1639) was also a composer. He may not have the fame of César Franck, but they both have the same surname. Richard David Ramsey 22:56, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

(after edit conflict) I referred to the lack of need for disambiguation in my question. Of those names, the only other composer or musician was Melchior Franck, who is far, far less often encountered than César. To most musicians and music lovers, Melchior is virtually unknown. There was more than one Brahms (Caryl Brahms being a novelist), there have been various non-musical Tchaikovskys, numerous Brittens, and Schuberts (including at least 3 other composers named Schubert), etc etc. Yet in the context of a music concert or broadcast, "Brahms", "Tchaikovsky", "Britten" or "Schubert" tells us everything we need to know and there's no possibility of any confusion. Why would it be necessary to make a special case for "Franck" in such a context? In an oral discourse, if one refers to "Mozart, Haydn, Chopin", it's clear that they're being referred to by their surnames, so "Franck" would not be misconstrued as a reference to Frank Martin, for example.

I suspect it's down to this: "We've always spelled out his full name because ... we always have. It's simply become a tradition; people have come to expect us to refer to 'César Franck', so we oblige; and thus the tradition continues, and will continue to continue". But that's just my guess and I could be way off. I can understand how a composer gets their full name when they're just starting out, because most people have never heard of them. It's only when they become well known that the first name tends to gets dropped. César Franck has long since passed this point, yet his first name has always been retained. -- JackofOz (talk) 23:09, 21 July 2008 (UTC)Reply

See also Johann Franck (1618-1677) and Johann Wolfgang Franck (1644-1710). Now we have more Francks than you can shake a conductor's stick at. Richard David Ramsey 23:14, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

True, there was more than one composer named Franck, just as there was more than one composer named Schubert. Why is "Schubert" taken to refer to Franz Peter Schubert only (unless it's in the context of a discussion about one of the other ones)? It's because he's far better known than the other Schuberts. Same with César Franck - he's far better known than the other Francks. There really is no need to disambiguate him, as far as the music-listening public is concerned. If I wrote that I was going off to a concert to hear some music by "Franck", would you wonder which Franck I was talking about? Honestly now.

Look, I'm not trying to make a case for broadcasters and program note writers to change their practice and refer to him as "Franck" only, because I can't see the tradition ever changing, and that's not what WP is for anyway. I'm just trying to get to the bottom of why it's become a tradition in the first place, and none of the reasons that have been canvassed here have convinced me so far. -- JackofOz (talk) 23:38, 21 July 2008 (UTC)Reply

This line appears in this article twice, and is quoted only once. I suspect that if it is quoted in the other instance it would sound even more odd. Maybe one of them should be removed. I don't know, it just sounds awkward. 128.194.39.250 (talk) 20:48, 23 March 2009 (UTC)Reply

"The key to his music may be found in his personality"? Really? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Amber388 (talk • contribs) 14:32, 23 June 2009 (UTC)Reply

It's misleading to say he was born in a country that didn't exist at the time. Peter jackson (talk) 10:56, 27 June 2009 (UTC)Reply

I've provided two of three missing citations; in the case of the second (covering 1848-1858) I've supplied some additional details that came to light while I was checking sources. I'm uncertain as to what the remaining query should cover, since there are both some factual statements in this paragraph thus tagged and what amounts to an opinion as to the quality of the "Grande Piece Symphonique". The facts should be easily verifiable, and with some very minor editing should be easily citable. I have no quarrel with the opinion as such - although critcs seem to vary: see Vallas vs. Davies - but it probably should come from An Authority of some sort. The source citation for the Concise Grove should also probably be cleaned up by, among other things, citing the writer of the article on Franck rather than the general editor of the work, as well as making sure that the title is correct. I think it may be the Norton/Grove Concise Encyclopedia of Music, with other minor adjustments. Originalylem (talk) 23:00, 26 March 2010 (UTC)Reply

For this article, it would probably be more correct to first refer to this church by its original name and status as a parish church (1856), which it was during Franck's lifetime. As with the reference to Liège as part of the Netherlands at the time of Franck's birth but becoming part of Belgium when that kingdom was formed in 1830, a parenthetical or other phrase would help place the church in its current status as a minor basilica (1896), which title is often used today. The parish itself uses both "Paroisse Sainte Clotilde" and "Basilique Sainte Clotilde" [1]. I leave it to the stylemasters to weigh in on how they'd like to refer to a French church in an article written in English; but unless someone objects violently, I will eventually revert the reference in the Biography paragraph 3 to its original denotation as a parish church, which is how Franck would have known it. The real point, of course, is the organ. Originalylem (talk) 18:23, 23 June 2010 (UTC)Reply

I'm surprised this article makes no mention of César's brother, Joseph Franck (31 October 1825, Liège - 20 November 1891, Issy-les-Moulineaux) who was also a composer and pianist.4meter4 (talk) 10:40, 26 June 2010 (UTC)Reply

I think the chief question would be "notability" as the Wiki community defines and practices it. If J. Franck merits an article - even a short one - of his own, then he certainly should be cross-referenced to his elder brother and vice-versa. I'm not sure how well Joseph is known outside (or even within) France. One test might be whether Joseph is covered in, for example, any edition of Grove's Dictionary of Music, or the Oxford Companion to Music, particularly the more recent editions. If he's in one or more of those or similar publications, Joseph probably ought to be featured in Wikipedia, and the cross-references would follow. It's worth checking out. Originalylem (talk) 13:28, 28 June 2010 (UTC)Reply

I wasn't necessarily saying an article should be created on J. Franck; just that a brief mention in César's biography would be a good idea. It's of biographical interest to César and therefore worth noting here, regaurdless of Joseph's notability on his own.4meter4 (talk) 13:43, 28 June 2010 (UTC)Reply

It certainly was awkward of C. Franck to have the parents he did and be born where he was, compounded by the subsequent history of that birthplace; but I can't help thinking that the quadruple nationality added to the article's first sentence is not helpful or accurate in any categorizing of Franck or his music. I know of no (reputable) source which would not characterize Franck's music as part of French culture, and (to the extent of my review of secondary and not primary sources) Franck never identified himself with any country other than France. Possibly the easiest solution which still fits the facts would be to drop the usual nationality adjectives here and to rewrite the sentence to specify his composition of French music. The specifics of his birthplace and ancestry can then be left to the biographical section. Comments? Originalylem (talk) 02:29, 11 December 2010 (UTC)Reply

That sounds like a good idea to me. The current text is a mess. Graham87 02:36, 11 December 2010 (UTC)Reply

I've been looking everywhere for them, 1. FWV 35 Fantaisie La(=A) Majeur 2. FWV 36 Cantabile Si(=B) Majeur 3. FWV 37 Pièce Héroïque si(=b) mineur Does anyone know them (there are just 3) or where to find them, preferably a list of ALL of his opus numbers. All I have is the FWV catalog, which is OK, but I want the original opus numbers of Franck himself, not a modern cataloger. Thanks. Russ D. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.18.115.51 (talk) 13:01, 26 May 2014 (UTC)Reply

Have you tried this webpage: [2]? It can be found by following the first External Link listed at: [* (in French) Catalogue des oeuvres at List of compositions by César Franck. Although no Opus number is given for those two, alas. There are quite a lot without any, in fact. Regards. Martinevans123 (talk) 15:47, 26 May 2014 (UTC)Reply

The standard for composers with Wikipedia seems to be to state their nationality in the first sentence. For example, "Beethoven was a German composer" and "Brahms was a German composer and pianist".

I think we should adopt this standard. For ideas, the French article states "Franck was a teacher, organist and composer of Belgian origin, naturalized French in 1870" (i.e. professeur, organiste et compositeur d'origine belge, naturalisé français en 1870). The German article states "Franck was a French composer and organist of German-Belgian background/ancestry" (i.e. war ein französischer Komponist und Organist deutsch-belgischer Abstammung).

How about "Franck was a Belgian-born composer and organist of French citizenship"? Something like this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.88.82.18 (talk) 02:47, 21 March 2016 (UTC)Reply

For one thing, he wasn't "Belgian-born" because when he was born there was no such thing as Belgium. —  Cliftonian (talk)  07:59, 30 March 2016 (UTC)Reply

For reasons I have forgotten (I'm not a huge fan of Franck), I have made a sortable table at User:MinorProphet/César Franck - List of works which combines the contents of

• List of compositions by César Franck by genre
• List of compositions by César Franck by opus number

which clarifies the FWV and Opus numbering, and (I hope) fills out the gaps/errors in both lists. The table need a few finishing touches, eg italics for titles, etc.

Although I feel that text lists are visually infinitely more pleasing than a table, they make it very difficult to compare composition/publication dates and so on, especially in cases like Franck's works. I am proposing a merge of both pages into List of compositions by César Franck (currently a disambig), to replace both the current pages. I have posted this message on both the respective talk pages, and also here. It might be best to reply on my own talk page, to keep the discussion in one place. >MinorProphet (talk) 13:02, 3 October 2016 (UTC)Reply

  Done MinorProphet (talk) 07:03, 2 January 2017 (UTC)Reply

Well, as stated above, I wasn't a huge fan of←the Muscles from Brussels er, shurely you mean Eddie Merkx, or was that Hergé, hmm, that's enough famous Belgians→our César. But just the other day I heard Ce qu'on entend sur la montagne, and for a man born in a fairly flat part of Northern Europe, it's not too bad. My rendering of the title is Heard on the mountainside, and for my money it knocks Liszt into a cocked hat. MinorProphet (talk) 07:07, 13 October 2017 (UTC)Reply

... er... are you side-referencing operettist Hervé? ... Schissel | Sound the Note! 03:34, 15 May 2020 (UTC)Reply

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on César Franck. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20061016053341/http://www.deccaclassics.com/music/composers/franck.html to http://www.deccaclassics.com/music/composers/franck.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

 Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:22, 16 August 2017 (UTC)Reply

(Edit: whoopsie, I forgot I didn't change it here, I changed the dates at the Hulda (opera) page itself. My mistake.) - Eric S. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Schissel (talk • contribs) 03:33, 15 May 2020 (UTC)Reply

Hello— [This revert] by Graham87 is puzzling me; part of its summary above all "rv, not needed, too old, unclear sourcing format". I understand the sourcing format was not good. OK, fair enough, sorry, but it could have been amended. But: not needed/ too old? This cannot be serious. Not needed? Too old? Too OLD? We should be overjoyed to have a contemporary testimony (Vincent d'Indy's) about Franck's hands, somebody who actually saw them, and to have the document fully quoted available, saying that: "Comme Weber, Franck avait les mains fort grandes, il lui arrive, en conséquence, fréquemment d’écrire des accords qui exigent un extrême écartement du pouce au cinquième doigt ; certains passages, en raison de ces écarts, sont donc assez difficiles à noter sur deux portées," It is in French, true, but can be translated. As for the second part of the revert, I am less puzzled. I understand it is important to know if in Smith's book, it is the musical intervals or the number of keys that is mentioned, but as it amounts to just the same, I had erased the template asking for this to be checked. A note (mentioning either) or a parenthesis would seem better than a template asking for clarification, I thought, and still do think so. I leave this comment here for other contributors with more interest in old things to judge what is best. --U.A.— 22:43, 18 August 2020 (UTC)Reply

@UNMASKED ANONYMOUS: Firstly, maybe it's just because I use a screen reader, but I couldn't figure out what book you were actually using from the link and the sourcing information you gave. Secondly, as a tertiary source, Wikipedia generally prefers reliable secondary sources as opposed to contemporary accounts. Putting extra references in sentences with no further context is a form of refboombing, though this example is much milder than those given in the linked essay. D'Indy's biography of Franck seems to be used quite often in the article in an English translation ... that translation should be used for any further citations to the work, though I don't think d'Indy's quote about Franck's large hands is compelling enough to use here in full. Having said all that, I've added a link to the French Wikisource version of the book in the references section. Graham87 03:41, 19 August 2020 (UTC)Reply

@Graham87: Thank you for your reply. d'Indy book is indeed quoted in its English translation in the page but I don't have it and cannot quote it fully. The issue was apparently to resolve the problem raised by the "refneed" template with a full quote but if all users think it is better the way it is, fine. I still think that a fully quoted contemporary account of this kind of physical fact has a strong weight and, less importantly, that, as for whether C. Franck's hand span was expressed either in number of keys or as a musical interval in Smith's book, it is not a real issue; but again, thank you for your time. Yours, --U.A.— 10:07, 19 August 2020 (UTC)Reply

Grove here gives "Franck, César(-Auguste-Jean-Guillaume-Hubert)", i.e. all hyphenated? Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 12:59, 14 August 2021 (UTC)Reply

  This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 17 January 2023 and 12 May 2023. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Fernando Cardenas Jr, Ianpheth, Aaron Khim (article contribs).

— Assignment last updated by Jmares3218 (talk) 03:41, 12 May 2023 (UTC)Reply